Summary Aims This study assessed type 2 diabetes treatment outcomes and process indicators using a comprehensive type 2 diabetes patient cohort in North Karelia, Finland, from 2011 to 2016. Methods Data from all diagnosed type 2 diabetes patients (n = 8429) living in North Karelia were collated retrospectively from regional electronic patient records. We assessed whether HbA1c and low‐density lipoprotein (LDL) were measured and managed as recommended. Results The HbA1c measurement rate improved (78% vs 89%) during 2011‐2012 and 2015‐2016, but a gradual deterioration in glycaemic control (HbA1c < 7.0% or 53 mmol/mol) was observed among both females (75% vs 67%) and males (72% vs 64%). The LDL measurement rate initially improved from the baseline. LDL control (<2.5 mmol/L) improved among both females (52% vs 59%) and males (58% vs 66%). A gender difference was observed in the achievement of the treatment target for LDL, with females showing worse control. Conclusions Low‐density lipoprotein (LDL) control in type 2 diabetes patients has improved, but the existence of gender disparities needs further attention. Maintaining appropriate HbA1c control among type 2 diabetes patients over time appears to be difficult. Active follow‐up and tailored treatment have the potential to improve the quality of care. Electronic patient records could be more efficiently used to improve the quality of care and to support decision‐making.

Aims Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a progressive disease often associated with comorbidities that complicate the management of T2D and affect the achievement of treatment targets. However, adherence to guidelines and individualized treatments can potentially improve treatment outcomes. This study assessed the association between different glucose lowering and lipid lowering medication lines and the achievement of treatment targets with different comorbidities among a T2D cohort in North Karelia, Finland (2011-12 to 2015-16). Methods The data on all diagnosed T2D patients (n = 10,190) in North Karelia were collated retrospectively from regional electronic health records (EHRs). Analyses were performed considering the age, sex, and comorbidities such as cardiovascular diseases (CVD) and any mental disorders (AMD). We analyzed the trends in using glucose lowering and lipid lowering medications and the effect of changes in medication on the achievement of treatment targets among different patient groups. Results Metformin was the most common treatment in all patient groups. The use of only metformin declined and the use of metformin and/or other non-insulin medications increased during the follow-up. A Combination of insulin and non-insulin medication was mostly used by T2D patients with both cardiovascular diseases and mental disorders (T2D + CVD + AMD), and the use of insulin increased among this group in follow-up. Achievement of the glucose treatment target deteriorated even after the intensification of medication among all patient groups during the follow-up. A considerably higher number of patients with T2D + AMD and T2D + CVD + AMD did not use lipid lowering medication when compared to the T2D + CVD patients both at baseline and follow-up. However, the achievement of the LDL treatment target improved during the follow-up. Conclusion Achievement of the glucose target deteriorated even after the intensification of treatment, and especially among patients with multiple diseases. Many T2D patients with AMD and CVD remained without lipid lowering medication, which needs further attention.

To compare the quality of diabetes care among type 2 diabetes patients with and without mental disorders during six-year follow-up in North Karelia, Finland. Methods: All type 2 diabetes patients (n = 10190) were analysed using the electronic health records data from 2011-12 to 2015-16. The diabetes care was evaluated using the measurement activity and the achievement of the treatment targets for HbA1c and LDL. Results: Monitoring of HbA1c and LDL levels improved among all patient groups, except the dementia patients. The proportion of those achieving the HbA1c target declined and those achieving the LDL target improved in all patient groups. Differences in the changes of achievement of the target HbA1c level among patients with dementia and depression were observed when compared with those having only type 2 diabetes. Conclusions: This study highlights the challenge of glucose level management as the age and comorbidities of the patients related to the care and achievements of the treatment targets. Mental disorders that are likely to affect patients' adherence to medication and other treatments should be taken into account and more support for self-care should be provided to such patients.